Iraqi PM Demands U.S. Pullout Timetable

Al-Maliki Says Security Pact With The U.S. Must Include "Specific Deadline"

(AP)  Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki dug in his heels Monday on the future of the U.S. military in Iraq, insisting that all foreign soldiers leave the country by a specific date in 2011 and rejecting legal immunity for American troops.

Despite the tough words, al-Maliki's aides insisted a compromise could be found on the two main stumbling blocks to an accord governing the U.S. military presence in Iraq after a United Nations mandate expires at the end of the year.

Last week, U.S. and Iraqi officials said the two sides agreed tentatively to a schedule that includes a broad pullout of combat troops by the end of 2011 with the possibility that a residual U.S. force might stay behind to continue training and advising Iraqi security services.

But al-Maliki's remarks indicated his government was not satisfied with that arrangement and wants all foreign troops gone by the end of 2011.

That cast doubt on whether an agreement is near and suggested al-Maliki is playing to a domestic audience frustrated by the war and eager for an end to the foreign military presence.

"There can be no treaty or agreement except on the basis of Iraq's full sovereignty," al-Maliki told a gathering of Shiite tribal sheiks. He said an accord must be based on the principle that "no foreign soldier remains in Iraq after a specific deadline, not an open time frame."

Al-Maliki said the U.S. and Iraq had already agreed on a full withdrawal of all foreign troops by the end of 2011 — an interpretation that the White House challenged. Until then, the U.S. would not conduct military operations "without the approval" of the Iraqi government, al-Maliki said.

White House spokesman Tony Fratto said negotiations with the Iraqis were continuing and repeated the U.S. position that the withdrawal must be linked to conditions in Iraq — a clear difference with al-Maliki's interpretation of what had been agreed.

"Any decisions on troops will be based on the conditions on the ground in Iraq. That has always been our position and continues to be our position," Fratto said Monday in Crawford, Texas. "There is no agreement until there is an agreement signed."

Fratto said the U.S. was "optimistic that Iraq and the U.S. can reach a mutual agreement on flexible goals" and allow "Iraqi forces to provide security for a sovereign Iraq."

President Bush has long resisted a timetable for removing troops from Iraq, even under strong pressure from an American public distressed by U.S. deaths and discouraged by the length of the war that began in 2003.

Last month, however, Bush reversed course and agreed to set a "general time horizon" for bringing troops home, based on Iraq's ability to provide for its own security. But the Iraqis insisted they want a specific schedule.

"We find this to be too vague," a close al-Maliki aide told The Associated Press on Monday. "We don't want the phrase 'time horizons.' We are not comfortable with that phrase," said the aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the negotiations.

Another top al-Maliki aide, also speaking on condition of anonymity for the same reason, said the Iraqi government had "stopped talking about the withdrawal of combat troops. We just talk about withdrawals," including trainers and logistics troops.

U.S. and Iraqi officials said last week they had agreed to remove American combat troops from Iraq's cities by next June, withdrawing to bases where they could be summoned if necessary. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue, but the plan appeared in line with a U.S. strategy to turn urban security over to Iraqi police.

During his Monday address, al-Maliki also suggested the question of legal immunity for U.S. military personnel or contractors remains a sticking point in the negotiations.

The draft agreement provides that private U.S. contractors would be subject to Iraqi law but the Americans are holding firm that U.S. troops would remain subject exclusively to U.S. legal jurisdiction. The U.S. has ruled out allowing American soldiers to face trial in Iraqi courts.

But al-Maliki said his country could not grant "open immunity" to Iraqis or foreigners because that would be tantamount to a violating the "sanctity of Iraqi blood." He did not elaborate.

One of the al-Maliki aides said he believed language could be found to overcome differences over the withdrawal schedule but immunity was a tougher issue to resolve.

U.S. officials in Washington have privately expressed frustration over the Iraqi stand in the negotiations, which were supposed to have ended by July 31. The agreement must be approved by Iraq's factious 275-member parliament, where opposition to a deal is strong.

It appeared al-Maliki was seeking to bolster his nationalist credentials ahead of provincial elections late this year and a national ballot in 2009.

Al-Maliki's Shiite allies face a strong challenge from followers of anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, long an opponent of the U.S. presence. The prime minister's strong statements in support of an end to immunity and for a firm withdrawal timetable would make it difficult for him to accept an agreement that falls short of his public demands.

[ajayvee]

I just can''t understand this al-Maliki. He is the puppet-head of a conquered and humiliatingly occupied land and as such his job is to obey. He is in no position to ''demand'' anything. For goodness sakes, will someone please tell this fool once and for all not to take his make-believe title too seriously,

[liberalme]

This is THEIR country--they NEVER invited us there--there was absolutely no reason to go there and now they want us out!!

YIKES!!!
Before Bush gets the oil????

Loser Bush, Loser Rice, Loser Cheney--your "party" is over!!!

Get us OUR of Iraq!!!!

[thegoodtexan]

al-Maliki dosn''t seem to be taking the bait. Maybe he would believe a "Time Mirage" or a "Smoke and Mirrors Draw Down". Phoney Bush has been having a hard time bambuseling people lately. First Putin, now al-Malili.

[underdogus87]

We''re in a catch 22 we can''t stay and we can''t leave!!

[brianbwb-2009]

Even a Bushpuppet like Maliki knows his limits, the US military will be of no help in the face of imminent mass uprisings, so the US had better clear out before they cause him to be lynched, the more he supports the US, the more of an enemy to his own people he becomes.

Now is the best chance he has of keeping his hand on the oil spigot, any earlier and he would have had to share control with Al Sadr (and Al Sadr would have gotten the lion''s share, which still might happen), any longer and he might be a little too dead to be the bartender.

Besides he also knows that a president Obama would pull out even faster than Bush/McSame, so he tries to help the puppetmaster save some false pride, and pretend that they "won" something, while simultaneously appearing to the less educated among the Iraqis as if he is actually ordering the US out, and that the US is actually following "his" demand.

[miamiderick]

It doesn%u2019t matter what he agrees with Bush. Bush will be gone shortly, and who ever takes over will not honor his agreement.

[docpeter-2009]

From the above article, "Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said Monday no security agreement with the United States could be reached unless it included a "specific deadline" for the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq."
________________

I got a time table for you, how about we leave today?

Think you and yours can handle the "insurgents"?

[jgunther7]

docpeter, they would be very happy to see us leave like yesterday. Al-Maliki is already drawing up oil contracts with China, and the Russians and Syrians are working on a pipeline deal that would take Iraqi oil straight through to the Mediterranean. The Russian military would protect it with an anti-missile shield.

[boandco]

Six years ago the Iraqi people had a lot of respect and admiration for the United States. The US invasion went virtually unopposed. Now the US Army has instilled a deep hatred for everything American that will last for generations. They will form alliances with Iran, Syria, China and Russia and exclude anything to do with the US. We are the people that murdered their mothers and fathers, their brothers and sisters and their cousins. We have destroyed their country.

[hunterdon6]

There has been alot of good done over in Iraq. It just never gets reported. Good does not sell newspapers or get high ratings at the 6 o''clock news. The old saying is " if it bleeds it leads". Time will heal all wounds.

[jgunther7]

Russia is already building a new Mediterranean sea port in Syria and President Bashar al-Assad is meeting with President Medvedev in Moscow to sign new agreements. The US though they could control Iraqi oil production with a naval blockade of Basra, however a direct outlet on the med would give Iraq complete independence.

[ibzjem]

Yep, time to go. I''ve spoken to a number of army VETs that have served multiple tours over there and they say it''s time to go. It''s time Iraq provide for themselves now.

[leftyintexas]

Hahahahaha! Where are all the republicons now? No response? I guess they''re speechless! Hahahahaha!

[talkingham]

Why not just leave... today. That would show these tirds and what would we lose.

Evidently to Bush and McCain, winning in Iraq means the establishment of a radical Shiite government in Iraq because that is all we have accomplished. We really should leave today, I doubt they would miss us.

[talkingham]

Hunterdon, I suggest you and your family move to Iraq and do some more good.

[marshall65]

Bush has already committed, on numerous occasions, to pull out of Iraq if the government requests we pull out.

We''re not staying and the ME will be something we will have to live with for years. Read On Point II-we messed things up so bad over there it will take a long time to recover. People in Baghdad are still struggling to get drinking water.

[screan_name]

The American people want us out.

The Iraqis want us out.

What''s there to argue about?

[riddelup-2009]

They want us out we want out where is the disconnect?

[realpatriot1]

It''s time for McCain & Bush to put the good of the country ahead of winning an election.

[liberalme]

There has been alot of good done over in Iraq. It just never gets reported. Good does not sell newspapers or get high ratings at the 6 o''''clock news. The old saying is " if it bleeds it leads". Time will heal all wounds.

Posted by hunterdon6 at 01:40 PM : Aug 25, 2008

Wonder how the 600,000 dead civilians and the 2 million displaced Iraqis feel about the "good that''s been done".

[liberalme]

There has been alot of good done over in Iraq. It just never gets reported. Good does not sell newspapers or get high ratings at the 6 o''''clock news. The old saying is " if it bleeds it leads". Time will heal all wounds.

Posted by hunterdon6 at 01:40 PM : Aug 25, 2008

Wonder how the 600,000 dead civilians and the 2 million displaced Iraqis feel about the "good that''s been done".

[true_red1]

The Iraqi PM demands... Why don''t we say, "How about tomorrow" and see if he still demands!

[benighse]

IT''S TIME TO GIVE IRAQ TO THE IRAQIS!

[johnpatrick9]

Iraq for the Iraqis..it is their Nation and we have no business being there and never did. We are a foreign occupation and that is anathema to any sovereign nation.
George Washington would not approve of our sticking our noses into a land and nation so far from our shores for such venial reasons.

[ontheleft]

The Iraqis want us out of there. That means ALL troops. What part of this does Bush not understand?

[johnpatrick9]

The amount of dead and maimed do not justify the removal of one two bit dictator supported by so many of his people. IF they wanted him out they could have put a round into him but no one ever did...so slaves deserve their chains and probably even idealize their condition...not our *** business and never was...oh yeah except for the oil and to waste our national treasure on our military-industrial-corporate complex at the expense of the People of America who have gained NOTHING FROM THIS CRIMINAL WASTE.

[notfooled]

Of course bush wants to drag this out as long as possible. Every month we stay there adds big dollars to the bottom line profits his co-conspiritor cronies rake in from this war-for-profit scheme they cooked up.

[lovegetpeace]

If the Surge and Iraq in general was such a huge success after 4000 plus death soldiers and $500 Billions, why not get out completely?

Or, is there something else Americans do not know why we invaded Iraq?

[scottyusa]

Iraqi PM Demands U.S. Pullout Timetable

Okay, how about tomorrow?

[denn034]

I thought the agreement was specific. My mistake.

[rob416]

Good for Nori. Its about time somebody tells Bush we need to pull all of our troops out of Iraq besides the huge numbers of Americans that pay for them to be there.

[misha128-2009]

Maliki said he wanted a time line.

Condi and Bush claim they negotiated a time horizon for aspirational goals. Weren''t there even rumors of signatures?

Now Maliki is back in the news insisting on a time line.

It does not seem these negotiations are remaining as private or going as well as President Bush and the White House would lead is to believe.

Or did Maliki out-Bush President Bush and unilaterally cancel the previous agreement like Bush did with Kyoto.

Didn''t President Bush also cancel an agreement with North Korea and according to his own Ex-UN Ambassador John Bolton only managed to renegotiate a equally bad deal after making even more concessions to the North Koreans?

[notfooled]

There has been alot of good done over in Iraq. It just never gets reported. Good does not sell newspapers or get high ratings at the 6 o''''''''clock news. The old saying is " if it bleeds it leads". Time will heal all wounds.
Posted by hunterdon6 at 01:40 PM : Aug 25, 2008

Wonder how the 600,000 dead civilians and the 2 million displaced Iraqis feel about the "good that''''s been done".
Posted by liberalme at 03:26 PM : Aug 25, 2008

Add to that only 4 hours of electricity daily if they''re lucky and the daily fear that one of their loved ones mught be caught in a bldg the US military decides should be leveled to kill 1 or 2 enemy combatants for every 15-20 civilians killed.

[newz4i]

Cheney and Bush told Americans where to put it when "we" wanted out.

Hmm, why can''t the duo tell the Iraqis the same?

[canyoutellme-2009]

so now Iraq wants ALL foreign troops OUT. Good for Maliki for digging in his heels and not budging on this point. So, the DEMS are right once again... Iraqis DO NOT WANT our troops there... they flat out said it here!

One arguement of the CONs is that if we pull out, we admit defeat.. .and furthermore, MILLIONS will die in iraq due to our departure... well, now if MILLIONS die, you can pin it on the Iraqi people themselves, not the US soldiers... so CONs, this is your way out.. TAKE IT! BRING OUR TROOPS HOME!!

[alohaone1]

the Stupid Dems has done it again! The Dems have times and again sell out our troops and national interests since the Vietnam days ( except for Bill Clinton , the only Good Dem in this nation). Disagree with the reasons to go into Iraq all you want , but now , as things are getting better , this is the time we demand pay-backs from the Iraqis for our effort , not that we wanted to rob them as we went in like the Dems claim , but as our troops sacrificed tremendouslly there for their freedom and safety from a civil war , we should see some gratitudes of some sorts , but no , Now our troops are kicked out , why they did not do that before the Surge , when the killings were still going on , why now ? all because of the Dems politicians , the Iraqis would not have the guts to talk to us like this if it is not for Obama and the stupid Dems . The Dems rather we lost in Iraq first , but now , as we succeeded with the Surge , they rather us go home empty handed and leave everything to the Russians and Chinese , great , our troops fight and die for free. Like I said , I am just glad that it is not as bad as Vietnam , but when your own people stab you from behind ,what can we do?

[lovegetpeace]

About 1 month ago, there was a report that Iraq has at least $85 billion from it own oil. Americans cannot touch it even after over 4100 death soldiers and $500 Billions war cost and counting.

[lovegetpeace]

Folks,
Amazing how Idiot America really is in Iraq and Afghanistan.

[lovegetpeace]

The State of Israel is the source of all of American''s problems in the Middle-East.

[alohaone1]

so now Iraq wants ALL foreign troops OUT. Good for Maliki for digging in his heels and not budging on this point. So, the DEMS are right once again... Iraqis DO NOT WANT our troops there... they flat out said it here!

One arguement of the CONs is that if we pull out, we admit defeat.. .and furthermore, MILLIONS will die in iraq due to our departure... well, now if MILLIONS die, you can pin it on the Iraqi people themselves, not the US soldiers... so CONs, this is your way out.. TAKE IT! BRING OUR TROOPS HOME!!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by canyoutellme at 04:03 PM : Aug 25, 2008

the Iraqis , sensing support from the stupid Dems and Obama , play tough on us . I don''t blame them , our own people stab us in the back , that is why the Iraqis have the gut to even talk to us like this . What a sad joke . America is once again betrayed by her own kinds . We put in the Surge , stabilized the country , and now got kicked out , why it didn''t happen a year ago ? thanks Dems for the damages again. The dems are never good at foreign policies , they are only good at spoiling it.

[rob416]

Posted by alohaone1 at 4:03 PM:

Very intelligent blaming the democrats for what Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki wants. The republicans under George W Bush and *** Cheney (or it is the other way around) are in charge and they sent the troops their in the first place.

Troops in iraq do not necessarily serve our National interests. Where is the advantage of Iraq oil? Why are we paying for Iraq''s rebuilding when they have a huge surplus of money in the bank? National interests, I can''t seem to locate it.

[rob416]

POsted by lovegetpeace at 4:08 PM:

Are you anti semetic?

[lovegetpeace]

Posted by alohaone1 at 04:10 PM : Aug 25, 2008

Are you loyal to the Republican Party or to USA?

I mean, go ahead and blame it on the Democrats or Liberals, I cannot see what you will win with that in the end.

[notfooled]

Of course bush wants immunity, hitler wanted the same thing.

[lovegetpeace]

Posted by rob416 at 04:15 PM : Aug 25, 2008

YES, SI and QUI!!! I am an extremely proud Anti-Semitic.

According to our US State Department, Anti-Semitics is exploding around the world:
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN1334791720080314?feedType=RSSfeedName=topNews&rpc=22&sp=true

[tawpdawg111]

If it weren''t so serious it would be comedy!

We agitate everyone in the whole world!

This fledgling democracy is only a couple years old and, indeed, owes its very existence to us, yet cannot help but get pizzed off at us.

We pith off EVERYONE!

[rf35]

While I am opposed to continued presence in Iraq...

Al-Maliki needs to sit down and shut up. We don''t even need to invade; we''re already there! We installed his government and can dismantle it, if necessary. As the invaders, we do not need his permission to do anything. Military members being tried in Iraqi courts? Ridiculous! That is as unacceptable as troops being tried in US courts for supposed crimes in Iraq. It%u2019s the military%u2019s place to court-martial troops who are accused of offences, not civilian lawyers%u2019. Certainly not foreign officials%u2019. A status of forces agreement needs to be drawn up immediately.

I%u2019m sure a permanent presence was the Bush administration%u2019s plan from the start. I truly hope our next president has the balls to leave Iraq to the Iraqis and get us back in the fight against the terrorists in Afghanistan. Remember, Iraq was not involved in the 9/11 attacks, they were just a more profitable target.

[lovegetpeace]

If Bush did nothing bad, why does he wants immunity?

[ajaxtheleast]

"al-Maliki is playing to a domestic
audience frustrated by the war and eager
for the end to foreign military presence."

"domestic audience",,, "domestic audience."

Whoever might that be??

It sounds like some group that is right

in Iraq.,,,and they want us to leave.

I wonder if the Iraqi people know

who this "domestic audience" is???

(Somebody is afraid to have it read:

"PLAYING TO THE IRAQI PEOPLE FRUSTRATED

BY THE WAR AND EAGER FOR THE END TO

MILITARY PRESENCE.)

I can see why.

[whiskyrokkr]

Let''s go. We don''t want to upset the BBUU$$h puppet.